I have been a Spurs fan for more than 15 years now, and I have never seen they win a trophy. It all started when I got home one afternoon from school, and my grandfather was watching a Champions League match: Inter Milan vs. Tottenham. For context, I am a Spurs fan from abroad, so I had absolutely no affiliation with them whatsoever before becoming a fan.
Seeing that team playing in white, the same color as my local club, and Gareth Bale storming at San Siro made me curious about that random club with a funny name: Tottenham Hotspur. As a disclaimer, I have nothing against the name; it was just a combination of words I had never heard of for my native language or in my life at that point, in general. From that day on, I started to follow the club and got frustrated after most matches, like any good old London-born Spurs fan.
Since that time, I have identified several reasons why the Spurs are experiencing a particularly unbearable trophy drought (don't you dare think it's my fault; we've been here since 2008), and I have come up with a few explanations to account for this phenomenon.
For instance, the constant manager carousel, except for Rednapp, Pochettino, and now Postecoglou (for now); the transfer market methodology, with the underspending and missing on the right players, and the overspending on the wrong players (despite some bullseyes here and there); and, mainly, the culture behind the club, which innevoquotely gave us the famous nickname: Spursy.
I don't personally believe in that Spursy narrative, per se, as it's mostly banter from rivals. However, Tottenham Hotspur undeniably provides enough evidence for that same chat to repeat itself over and over again. Apparently, there is no such thing as an easy win at White Hart Lane, as I always tell my friends: the Spurs can be winning by a 10-goal margin, it ain't over yet.
With all that in mind, recent events and protests over the 25 years without winning a trophy circle back to one individual: Daniel Levy. Since purchasing the club and assuming the role of chairman in December 2000, his tenure as the decision-maker of Spurs football has been marked by controversy and questions regarding the development of a winning mentality. But, is it really all his fault?
The pros and cons of the ENIC administration?
I don't want to be unfair to Levy, despite my emotional attachment to Spurs sometimes clouding my judgment and preventing me from showing any sign of empathy towards his administration. At the same time, it is relevant to acknowledge the pros of ENIC's ruling before diving into the cons.
First and foremost, it is undeniable that Daniel Levy has transformed the football club from both a financial and structural perspective. I know, I know, that is precisely the main piece of criticism surrounding Levy and the whole "business before football" discourse. Even so, that aspect is pivotal for any professional sports enterprise to succeed and elevate its capital and its status to a new level.
If we have now one of the most modern and eye-catching stadiums in Europe and one of the most advanced training centers, it is due to Levy and his good spending on infrastructure, which is a solid base from which the club can flourish. The maintenance of proper booking balances, resulting in positive financial outcomes, enabled Tottenham Hotspur to move from a mid-table club to the 9th with the most revenue in the world, according to a Deloitte report.
With a high-level structure and a good reputation in the market, Tottenham Hotspur have all the tools to attract some of the best players in the world, as one of the most intriguing sporting projects in place. Or, that's what you would assume, at least.
The real problem with Spurs is how they allocate their resources and which footballing brand they wish to stand for. Unfortunately, neither of these factors has been adequately explored, nor has it provided a clear path for fans to support it fully. Over the years, between a few periods of certainty, such as the Pochettino Era, Levy has been fluctuating regarding those two key factors.
The real issues with Daniel Levy and Spurs
In terms of transfer market strategy, this club has been a mess. I mean, who can forget the 2013 package, which included players such as Soldado, Paulinho, and Chadli? Players who required significant funds for club standards at the time and had little to no impact. Or the so-called "club signings," who allegedly had no managerial approval over the years, that Antonio Conte has emphasized during his tenure at the club? My point is that there is not always a clear strategy or consensus in that department, even with some good business being made.
Who should call the shot? The manager, the sporting director, or Levy? It is not the first time we have heard about the issues with Spurs' transfer policy, as I alluded to previously regarding the decisions to underspend and overspend. While Levy prefers to be more cautious in the market, even leaving it to Deadline Day to make moves at a cut price, the Spurs ultimately lost quality players. A recent example is Désiré Doué, who is excelling at PSG and was heavily linked with us.
However, the problem runs way deeper than just the transfer policies, which are directly reflected in the club's identity. Without a clear brand of football or a well-defined sporting project, the people in charge of football operations struggle to find a clear direction when making significant decisions, which is also a concern for Levy. From managers with completely opposing profiles to desperate attempts to win trophies at any cost, Tottenham Hotspur wasted some precious time.
The truth is that the Pochettino Era was an exception that proves the norm at Spurs. Although the Argentinian went trophy-less, the Spurs were a different animal than in previous years, where a 4th place in the league was almost considered a Premier League title. Poch elevated the standards for us and made us dream of higher heights when we had no hope of achieving them. Indeed, he has won nothing, but his project was the most solid in recent Spurs history, and we have never been closer to a trophy than under his leadership â after all, it's not just us who want to win, and it's not simple to do so at this level nowadays.
Therefore, it is clear that Spurs need a trophy to take that weight off our shoulders, but at what cost? I ask you, dear reader. If we change managers every one or two years, especially ones with no connection between one another, how are we supposed to sell a project with higher goals to future players, coaches, and investors? Levy's decisions in that area have given fans reason to worry, as maintaining the club's financial balance and structure is one thing. At the same time, making a concise sporting project, combining it with an organized transfer plan, and delegating it to the right people to execute it, is a whole different story.
I know this is a lengthy one, but overall, I don't believe Levy is the only one responsible for Tottenham Hotspur's trophy drought, as managers and players from past and present are also to blame for that. However, in my opinion, Daniel Levy is a significant part of the problem due to his confusing tactics in managing the football department, rather than leaving it to other professionals and focusing on the business side of the club, where he excels. Ange's project, for instance, has its merits, albeit limited, and it might ultimately bring us a trophy, but the problem at the club runs deep within the hierarchy.
